by Backshophoss
GOK,Door Comm cable-27point,as is the MU cable.
The Land of Enchantment is not Flyover country!
Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
David Benton wrote:syncronising power is quite common these days , most inverters are capable of doing it .That's not the problem. The problem is the load capacity of the cables running the power through the train consist. That's the limiting factor (as has been confirmed by those who know) on train length.
So you could have the head end p42 providing hep power , a p42 on the rear of the passenger cars , also providing power through a synchronising inverter , perfectly safely electrical wise .
David Benton wrote:yes , so if your feeding power from both ends your halving the load on the cables . im saying techincally it is possible to do this without having to electrically isolate the 2 halves of the train . you can feed in from both ends as long as one inverter is set up to synchronise with the other .Hmmm....reaching the outer ends of my knowledge regarding HEP systems. Does sound about right though.
David Benton wrote:They could remove one dining car.it has three .make meals optional or make otjer arrangements.The dining cars are heavily used (and they have dining sessions late into the night (I think at 5p/7p/9p). To accommodate these people in less space you'd have to add another session, either at 3p or 11p, all too far away from dinnertime.
Backshophoss wrote:There is a limit of how much Power can drawn off the 480 v buss,the highest power draw is the electric heating elements.Backshophoss,
it would be easier to split the HEP load between 2 seperate HEP sources then trying to sync up the whole mess!
When VIA still used the Alco powered LRC loco's, x-amount of cars were split between the 2 Locos.
(Roughly half the train was feed from the front loco,the rest from the trailing/rear loco)
gokeefe wrote:You know David the other possibility here is that their fares are a little on the low side. They might be underpricing what they should be charging at this time of year.It would be nice to see this train cover its costs . i think its around 84 % now . It seems possible to me for it to get to 100% , which must be a political coupe .
Hard to say for sure.
David Benton wrote:It would be more economic to make the cars more efficent anyway . It would be easy to shave 30- 50 % off the power use , making the need to supplant hep redundant .That's a very good point which has been supported by a user on this site who works with these systems (HVAC in particular) within Amtrak. He indicated quite a few apparent advantages and savings with the new systems as installed on the new Viewliner Diner #8400 Indianapolis, which featured among other things LED fixtures throughout.
the Hvac systems are over 30 years old , they still use elements for heating instead of heat pumps . plus use variable speed and soft start fans / pumps etc , it would pay for itself in a few years . You'd get better climate control as well .
David Benton wrote:Coup indeed as it would be the only of Amtrak's Long Distance trains to do so. Of course we all know that the Auto Trainis in a special category and has special arrangements that make it more efficient, but all the more reason to see it as a model for how to do things elsewhere.gokeefe wrote:You know David the other possibility here is that their fares are a little on the low side. They might be underpricing what they should be charging at this time of year.It would be nice to see this train cover its costs . i think its around 84 % now . It seems possible to me for it to get to 100% , which must be a political coupe .
Hard to say for sure.